Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Comment: if you're not Muslim, then... (Score 2, Insightful) 204

by dAzED1 (#48924213) Attached to: Facebook Censoring Images of the Prophet Muhammad In Turkey
If you're not Muslim, why the fark are you saying "the Prophet" Muhammad? Why would you grant that honorific if you don't yourself believe it? How would that be different than saying "Jesus the Messiah" while not Christian? And hey, if you do believe it "soulskill" then hey, why not, but I've been seeing this become more and more common among journalist at (theoretically) real - and thus, presumably impartial - news agencies. You know, ones that wouldn't say "Jesus the Messiah" and "Buddha the Enlightened One"

Comment: Re:Size (Score 1) 324

by jareth-0205 (#48882889) Attached to: What Will Google Glass 2.0 Need To Actually Succeed?

Live in terror and hide. Lots of hidden cameras that cost a fraction of the cost of Google glass!
Your doomed everyone is spying on you because you are so interesting!
This all hype driven garbage.

You're not thinking of the near future. Mass data storage of all video recorded anywhere + face recognition + trawling of video of you for embarassing / illegal behaviour. It's not hard to be worried for good reason, society needs the ability to *not* notice everything, and to forget. There are so many unknown and unclear laws that you are breaking some law all the time, you think adding the ability for that to be discovered will lead to a better society?

Comment: Re: Wow... Just "no". (Score 1) 204

by dAzED1 (#48877105) Attached to: Sends Personal Data To Over a Dozen Tracking Websites
when you say something fanatical like "no republicans have ever tried to push a bill like that on the entire country" you put yourself in a group that hates helping sick people and also tends to think it's great to blow up people elsewhere (like, suffering is just great all around, I guess). You then try to use the Constitution to justify your statements - but don't really understand what is in the document at all. Such as, the Constitution directly stating there shouldn't be a standing army. The two subjects are remarkably intertwined; ACA costs a small fraction of the wars in the middle east, and at least ACA provides a /benefit/. But hey, maybe you buck the system. Maybe you don't like our middle east involvement either - maybe you're an honest "constitutionalist." Which would be great, except for the farking part that the FFs were slave owners and treated women like crap. Stop pretending one side or the other are angels without flaws, and stop pretending the Constitution was sent by G-d. Argue something on it's own merits, not based on what some long-dead slave owner thought.

Comment: Re:Size (Score 1) 324

by jareth-0205 (#48874551) Attached to: What Will Google Glass 2.0 Need To Actually Succeed?

The world isn't black & white, despite what you seem to believe. Having no expectation of privacy is not the same as someone recording you and publishing your conversations... if I constantly followed you around with a videocamera that would be harassment.

Even in a public place there are expectations of "personal space", if "privacy" is too strong a word.

Comment: Re:Wow... Just "no". (Score 1) 204

by dAzED1 (#48866113) Attached to: Sends Personal Data To Over a Dozen Tracking Websites
to be fair, this was only really clear starting with Omnibus - prior to that, HIPAA relied a lot on common sense and a personal sense of ethics from the reader. Fortunately, the semi-retroactive nature of it to 2009, plus Omnibus being released 9 months prior to, means that yes - the government faces stiff penalties of paying itself money (amount=irrelevant, since paying self) and the BAs made $1.7BILLION for making a farking WEBSITE for fark's sake, so I don't think the 1.5M max fine will really cramp their style much.

Comment: Re:How is this not a HIPPA violation? (Score 1) 204

by dAzED1 (#48865909) Attached to: Sends Personal Data To Over a Dozen Tracking Websites
they can't, but the fine has a max penalty per year, and that max would just be the fed paying itself a number at which it wouldn't blink even if it wasn't paying itself. Just because something is illegal, doesn't mean it won't happen - if the only penalty for underage drinking was you had to have sex with Scarlet Johansen, do you think that would work as much of a deterrent? We don't live in a world where society can decide it doesn't accept a certain behavior, and then just expect everyone to not do it regardless what the penalty might be

Comment: Re:"Half Baked"? (Score 4, Insightful) 241

by jareth-0205 (#48854883) Attached to: Could Tizen Be the Next Android?

Let's be clear that Tizen is actually the child of Nokia's and Intel's Linux-based OS that was known as Meego, which owed much of its existence to Nokia's Maemo Linux platform and Intel's Moblin. That's a lot of history, and Samsung has added more and more. Half-baked? What a bizarre term.

"Been fiddled with for ages" doesn't really mean it's mature or ready. The fact is hasn't been on any significant number of devices in the real world would be a big flag, there's alot of refinement that comes from *actual* use in the wild that you don't get from lab development.

Comment: Re:Jurors (Score 1) 303

If the prosecution tries to obfuscate, the judge can sanction them, and the jury can see they are being treated like fools. The basics of this case are not even technical:
1. Some people set up a marketplace where consenting adults could exchange goods and services.
2. The government thinks that should be a crime.

You or I might not personally agree that these goods should be considered criminal, but the fact that they're a crime goes a bit beyond "the government *thinking*". They *are* illegal.

Comment: Re:No matter how much power we gave them ... (Score 1) 319

by jareth-0205 (#48773807) Attached to: MI5 Chief Seeks New Powers After Paris Magazine Attack

As long as the top level politicians are disciples of the cult of Politically Correctness the real problem, the problem with the Islamic barbarism will still remain.

That is true. Admitting that there is a problem with islam would be a very big step towards improvement. But since this is categorically denied, it is not possible to find a solution.

BTW, the vast majority of the victims of radical islam are themselves muslims. Maybe it is time for muslims to stand up and say, no, peeps, contrary to what political correctness suggest, we actually do have a problem in our religion, and here in the west it is actually possible to do something about it.

The point, rather obviously, is not to exterminate muslims, but to make the fringes of islam less barbaric.

But there's a problem also with assuming that there's a systemic problem with a whole belief system like that. Even if it were true (which I don't think it is, and doesn't seem to be from the muslims that I know) if you start saying there's a problem with this group you single them out for discrimination which is exactly the sort of response that the extreme fringes want you to do.

When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle. - Edmund Burke